tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21564696Thu, 13 Nov 2014 15:38:27 +0000music belle might likeChronicles of Academiathings that creep me outBurger KingEmily GouldFast Food is bad for you and NO one should eat itHeavy FriendsI can only take so much cheesy holiday music before I lose itI don't know what I'm watchingIraq WarIsaac HayesJon SpencerKenny Rogers roasted or bakedMajestic TwelveMemorial DayNew York TImesPalin the assPass The Egg NogReal-Life ReflectionsScreamin' Lord SutchThe Majestic TwelveWTF is the world coming to...Walk On ByWhopper VirginsWhy our media suck-diddly-ucksanarchismbad boysbang limeindie rockjoan wasserpolitical philosophypolitical theorypsychobillyretro-redheadsscared straightsee you on the other sideto protect and humiliatewhat's on secondwho's on firstLaw and Letters"Lots of really marvelous stuff" -- Larry Solum. "A particularly nice mix of academics and introspection" -- Dan Filler. "I think that she writes very substantively, and interestingly." -- Ann Bartow. "A must read blog--no qualifiers." -- Dave Hoffman. "One of the most entertaining and elegantly written blogs anywhere." -- Jim Chen. "I like your blog, too." -- Orin Kerr. "Your blog is awesome." -- Kermit Roosevelt III. "Belle, you are mighty too." -- Jeremy Freese.http://lawandletters.blogspot.com/noreply@blogger.com (Belle Lettre)Blogger1321125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21564696.post-4573917471751762839Thu, 06 Aug 2009 22:58:00 +00002009-08-07T09:53:59.254-07:00Destroying Public Education in CaliforniaSo let's say you're in charge of one of the most successful university systems in the country. Your state is in a budget crisis, held hostage by a small but strategically vocal minority that are so against taxation (while their "free market" has caused the crisis) that they'd rather see the entire state go bankrupt than to actually do something to solve the problem. As a result, the state has cut funding to your university system by a record amount, thereby creating some serious economic issues that you have to manage.<br /><br />So, how do you deal with this crisis? Do you:<br /><br />a) Utilize your $5-6 billion in emergency reserves as a means by which to stay afloat during this rather tumultuous economic period.<br /><br />b) Demand that the Regents act in their position to protect the university system as a public trust as dictated by your state's constitution, reject the governor's proposed budget and demand that the state's leaders provide the necessary funding to keep the education system intact.<br /><br />c) Hire new high level administrators at <a href="http://www.sacbee.com/education/story/1975302.html">a salary that is 27% higher than what their predecessors</a> made (along with an $100,000 relocation fund), raise tuition by over 9% with the promise of an additional increase in January, furlough or lay-off staff and faculty (thereby causing students to pay more for less services), and <a href="http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/08/06/BAGK1942B2.DTL"><span style="font-weight:bold;">give</span> the state a $200 million loan</a> to fund buildings on various campuses. <br /><br />If you answered "c", please send your resumé to:<br /><br />President Mark G. Yudof<br />University of California<br />1111 Franklin St<br />Oakland, CA 94607-5201<br />(510) 987-9029<br /><br />For more information on the crisis in leadership affecting the University of California, visit <a href="http://www.option4.org">http://www.option4.org</a>http://lawandletters.blogspot.com/2009/08/destroying-public-education-in.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Max)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21564696.post-6791666494174477303Tue, 23 Jun 2009 18:38:00 +00002009-06-23T12:06:45.699-07:00Finally back!I went to visit my parents for a week to attend my nephew's high school graduation and to be exploited for free child care. For some reason, the entire week I could not access Blogger. I could access blogspot blogs, but not the "create a new post" homepage. Weird. And frustrating. I did watch a lot of movies though, and I read a few books. It is really disturbing how I cannot remember anything I've read of a book I've read more than five years ago.<br /><br />Visiting your dysfunctional family, no matter how cute the kids nor how favorite the nephew (people who say they don't have favorite kids <span style="font-style: italic;">lie</span>), is always fraught with tension. I am glad to be back, although I always twinges with filial impiety guilt at the "when are you going to come home again" (not till the winter holidays if I can help it) and "why are you only visiting for so short a time" (to keep my sanity) and the "we miss you" (I miss you too, but not as much as I miss the freedom to come and go as I please and the other life I've built for myself). Maybe because all of these carry the attendant "when are you going to finally be done with school" and "why did you pick a career with such a limited job market that is geographically capricious" (because I never want to live in Orange County, within daily driving distance of my family again) and "why didn't you become a dentist or pharmacist, you could have been working for the past four years." AUGH. All of these are valid questions from your supportive (if dysfunctional) family, but I suspect that no one wants to hear them. <br /><br />The whole village/enclave model of family that's omnipresent in Vietnam has been somehow replicated in America. There are family businesses, and most of the members of my family work for each other and with each other. My mother, even as she's mildly crippled by arthritis and a bad fall several months back, still cooks food for 2-3 households and she and my father deliver them in tupperwares. It's nice, especially if you're both working parents as my siblings are, but then again you've just given your nosy and judgmental father a key to your house and he, even as he comes bearing food, enters your house willy nilly. There's no such thing as privacy in my family, which is why I so jealously guard my physical privacy (even as I share stuff with you all). Aside from TD, I guard my time and space and make appointments. Even with each other and our standing every night dates, we coordinate schedules and respect each other's space and the professional and personal lives we lead independently of one another. While I sort of miss the informality of the comings and goings of my siblings and how they all see each other and each other's kids without much notice or formality, I'm glad that no one just drops by unnanounced (yes, TD announces himself usually). You know that show "Friends"? In which Joey and Chandler and Phoebe and Ross seem to camp out at Monica and Rachel's apartment and drop by unannounced all the time and eat food? That seems nice to have such a tight circle of friends. It also seems really annoying. But perhaps this is why I appear to have so few local friends and hangout buddies around here such that I can't even tell if I'm going deaf if TD is out of town. Absent my one "anytime" friend (TD), I'm pretty socially isolated. I am improving, however: my sociability watch/index is improving, and I have more regular hangout dates with friends in the area (while they're in the area) than I did before. I have a TV watching buddy, and a <a href="http://whatwouldphoebedo.blogspot.com/2009/05/fitness-flaneur.html">flaneur buddy</a>.<br /><br />Which reminds me, now that I'm back and free to come and go as I please (even if it's not in and out of a friend's apartment, unannounced), I should set up some city walk dates with my architect friend (always fun to be able to ask "what's that?!" to someone who can say "Art Deco details/coffered ceilings") and a Battlestar Galactica date with my TV friend and a power walk date with my other friend (power walk after I drop her off some soup, of course).http://lawandletters.blogspot.com/2009/06/finally-back.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Belle Lettre)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21564696.post-7495985643085753609Mon, 15 Jun 2009 18:08:00 +00002009-06-15T11:37:19.546-07:00Things that make you feel old.My nephew is graduating from high school on Wednesday.http://lawandletters.blogspot.com/2009/06/things-that-make-you-feel-old.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Belle Lettre)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21564696.post-9182934149123080892Thu, 11 Jun 2009 15:53:00 +00002009-06-11T09:13:41.918-07:00My relationship with illicit substances.I don't drink coffee every day. One cup can work if I'm not too exhausted (I have been known to drink it like warm milk and feel like a nap), two cups make me jittery but awake for a few hours, three cups give me arrhythmia and clammy hands and I can't sleep later that night. I can't drink caffeine after 3 pm. I also don't drink it every day so that when I do need it and do drink it, it works. But I so rarely drink it, and the sweet spot amount I need is so variable that I don't know what's working: the caffeine or the adrenaline of approaching a deadline. I usually drink 1-2 cups of tea per day, and occasionally have headaches that I've learned are not caffeine withdrawal headaches but are merely headaches, and so I actually take Tylenol now, rather than drink the coffee I thought I needed but didn't.<br /><br />I also don't drink very often, so one drink will hit me hard, and possibly give me a hangover the next day, such that I will rue that one daquiri and curse my penchant for umbrella drinks. Certain red wines give me such a bad headache and hangover the next day, even for a one quarter or half glass, that I am thinking of avoiding untried varietals entirely and being one of those pfoufy women who only drinks white wine. Not white zinfadel, though. Nope, never.<br /><br />I eat a lot of sugar though. Like a cookie a day. Because I'm no longer 18 years old, I don't eat a ton of candy like I used to, and I definitely feel sugar overload much easier. I used to be able to eat a large chunk of fudge in 15 minutes. Now I eat that more slowly, like over 2-3 days.<br /><br />I also eat bacon every couple of weeks. Any more often and I'd feel like getting an angioplasty.<br /><br />What are your vices, and how do you use them? How do you control your use? How often do you indulge? What do you avoid, and what do you crave? One of my old roommates used to speak of "craving" alcohol, and needing a drink every night. It was better for her to drink a little every day rather than try to sublimate the craving and binge drink later. I never really understood that, but I as an American woman do understand the perils of dieting, binge eating, and the illicit allure of cookies and snack foods. I don't have much moral compunction over caffeine, fat, sugar, or alcohol, but I have a physical awareness of my body's responses to these substances and really limit my use, but I know that control is as much psychological as it is physical. And the physical only gets you so far, and it's taken me years to figure out my limits and how little I want to exceed them, such that I give myself psychological license to step back rather than give in. Because it wouldn't be (except with the sugar and fat) giving in per se, since I don't crave the other substances, so I gain less pleasure from a drink. The closest I can come to feeling like a "need" is the caffeine, which is strange to think about, considering how little coffee I drink.<br /><br />Note, none of this is code for drugs. I watched The Wire and marveled at all the drugs, since I have never really seen them. I actually am curious how most people consume the little vices and tasty/stimulating/tipsy-making vices.http://lawandletters.blogspot.com/2009/06/my-relationship-with-illicit-substances.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Belle Lettre)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21564696.post-2818707673026808619Thu, 11 Jun 2009 15:48:00 +00002009-06-11T08:53:28.961-07:00Culture ClashOne giant organization (The United States) <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/11/business/11auto.html?_r=1&amp;hp">attempts to reform the insular organizational culture of another</a> (GM).:<br /><br /><p></p><blockquote><p>But it will be up to the federal government, which will own a majority of <a href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/general_motors_corporation/index.html?inline=nyt-org" title="More information about General Motors Corporation">General Motors</a> when it emerges from bankruptcy, to tackle what is perhaps the most difficult challenge in Detroit: transforming <a href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/general_motors_corporation/index.html?inline=nyt-org" title="More information about General Motors Corporation">G.M.</a>’s insular culture — at times as bureaucratic as the government’s — to make the company more competitive.</p><p>If the effort fails, the <a href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/t/treasury_department/index.html?inline=nyt-org" title="More articles about the U.S. Treasury Department.">Treasury</a> may never recoup the $50 billion it has provided G.M. </p><p>“Addressing cultural issues is just as fundamental to our assignment as addressing the balance sheet or financing,” said <a href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/r/steven_rattner/index.html?inline=nyt-per" title="More articles about Steven Rattner.">Steven Rattner</a>, the lead adviser to the White House on the automobile industry.</p><p>In just one example, whenever a top G.M. executive was called to appear before lawmakers in Washington, staff members would prepare a briefing binder as thick as a Manhattan phonebook and hold multiple meetings to strategize over five minutes of testimony (<a href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/h/frederick_a_henderson/index.html?inline=nyt-per" title="More articles about Frederick A. Henderson.">Fritz Henderson</a>, the new chief executive, has told employees to stop doing that). </p><p>In a Senate hearing Wednesday, Ron Bloom, another adviser on the auto task force, also talked about the need for G.M. to break longstanding habits that have made the company, with its bloated structure, lose a step to more nimble competitors. </p><p>“General Motors has been kicking problems down the road for a long time,” Mr. Bloom said.</p>Mr. Rattner and other government officials have repeatedly said they have no interest in running the company day-to-day. But they are taking a keen interest in shaping the new leadership team.<br /><br />Measuring any progress in changing the culture will take time. The results, after all, will be seen in the new vehicles that the company develops and produces — and whether they reflect world-class business practices that are required to win against the best of its global competitors.</blockquote><br /><br />Yet another addition to the strucure/agency/culture debates! And one that suggests organizational culture flows from the top down, as evidenced by attempts to shape the new leadership:http://lawandletters.blogspot.com/2009/06/culture-clash.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Belle Lettre)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21564696.post-4166770342402528312Tue, 09 Jun 2009 16:43:00 +00002009-06-09T10:01:16.131-07:00Stay away, Belle<a href="http://movies.nytimes.com/2009/06/05/movies/05away.html">This </a>is exactly like the type of movie that would have appealed to my 20 year old self, yet I have the vague feeling that I should stay away from its twee sense of superiority:<br /><br /><p></p><blockquote><p>Verona’s question may or may not be disingenuous, but the answer provided by <a href="http://movies.nytimes.com/gst/movies/movie.html?v_id=453487&amp;inline=nyt_ttl">“Away We Go,”</a> the slack little road comedy in which it arises, is unambiguous. Far from being screw-ups, Verona and Burt, played with passive-aggressive winsomeness by Maya Rudolph and Jon Krasinski, are manifestly superior to everyone else in the movie and, by implication, the world. </p> <p>And even though they express themselves with a measure of diffidence, it’s clear that they are acutely, at times painfully, aware of their special status as uniquely sensitive, caring, smart and cool beings on a planet full of cretins and failures.<br /></p><p>To observe that they inhabit no recognizable American social reality is only to say that this is a film by Sam Mendes, a literary tourist from Britain who has missed the point every time he has crossed the ocean. The vague, secondhand ideas about the blight of the suburbs that sloshed around <a href="http://movies.nytimes.com/gst/movies/titlelist.html?v_idlist=83622;83621;180738&amp;inline=nyt_ttl">“American Beauty”</a> and <a href="http://movies.nytimes.com/gst/movies/movie.html?v_id=395937&amp;inline=nyt_ttl">“Revolutionary Road”</a> are now complemented by an equally incoherent set of notions about the open road, the pioneer spirit, the idealism of youth. </p> <p>Or something. Really, “Away We Go” is about the flight from adulthood, from engagement, from responsibility, even as it cleverly disguises itself as a search for all those things. But the dream of being left alone in a world of your own making, far from anything sad or icky or difficult, is a child’s fantasy. Not an unattractive or uncommon one, it must be said, and for that reason it is tempting to follow Burt and Verona into the precious, hermetic paradise that awaits them at the end of the road. You know they will be happy there. But you should also understand that you are not welcome. Does it sound as if I hate this movie? Don’t be silly. But don’t be fooled. This movie does not like you. </p></blockquote><p></p><p><br /></p><p>Hmmm. I'm also staying away from the new two-steps-away-from-snuff-porn <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/03/arts/03iht-dupont.html?_r=1&amp;ref=movies">Lars von Trier movie</a>, because the older I get, the less I want to be viscerally disturbed and emotionally decimated from watching a movie, which in theory should be my leisure time. There's something to be said for art that is challenging and difficult, but something in me broke a few years ago. Whereas previously I sought these extreme emotions, because their source was more foreign than the tumult of family life, now I can't bear to be so affected, for hours or days on end, by a visual and emotional depiction of pain and suffering, when my life is generally less dramatic now. I sort of get the American complacency that lacks a critical, self-directed eye and avoids difficult art, except that I am perfectly willing to read sad, difficult and emotionally disturbing literature, and allow myself to be so moved through words and imagination. That kind of emotional artistic experience I still seek. It's the visual depiction I can't bear, that so emotionally drains me. I've noticed too, that I shy away from violence much more easily now than I did when younger. In theory, I should be more desensitized, by now. But it just gives me nightmares. No, not even in the name of art. No.<br /></p>http://lawandletters.blogspot.com/2009/06/stay-away-belle.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Belle Lettre)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21564696.post-7452462556118678286Mon, 08 Jun 2009 07:02:00 +00002009-06-08T00:02:01.199-07:00Joyce Carol Oates on Salinger's Love LettersAnd on intimacy in the public sphere, in general:<br /><br /><blockquote>The Hawthornes' devotion to each other, and to the idealized image of each other they presented to the world, would seem to be a powerful rebuke of the debased and exploitative nature of intimacy in our time, in which lovers routinely betray each other in salacious ''memoirs'' (the most despicable of which must be James Hewitt's memoir of his love affair with Princess Diana, at a time when she was distraught over her failing marriage with Prince Charles) and by the peddling of intimate love letters (the most recent, 14 letters by J. D. Salinger, written in the 1970's to his much-younger lover Joyce Maynard, scheduled to be auctioned off by Sotheby's in June). No doubt, through the millennia lovers have betrayed one another, but the mass-marketing of such betrayals, at high prices, is a relatively new development in what we call civilization.<br /><br />Romance is a turbulent surf that, withdrawing, leaves a tangle of debris in its wake. Without the shimmering aura of love, mere words can be . . . mere words, and embarrassing. Without the stratagems of art, which are rarely spontaneous and unmediated, even the most heartfelt utterances not only sound banal, but are banal.<br /><br />It may have been that Nathaniel Hawthorne, the consummate artist, rereading his wife's ''maiden'' letters, decided to burn them as much for aesthetic as for personal reasons; for nothing leaves us more exposed and vulnerable, like a mollusk pried out of its shell, than heartfelt declarations, especially when examined by a neutral eye.<br /><br />It's a rare love letter that transcends the ephemeral occasion of its composition and endures as art, like those brilliant letters dashed off by Virginia Woolf to her flamboyant lover Vita Sackville-West or those teasingly enigmatic little notes composed by Emily Dickinson for her more intimate friends, both female and male.<br /><br />Usually, love letters are painful to read, especially after love has died; should we succumb to the temptation to read them, we are made guilty voyeurs. The collector who buys Salinger's letters will require, like all voyeurs, a convincing rationalization for his or her behavior. (Scholarly zeal, of course?)<br /><br />Anyone who confides in any writer risks being transmogrified into art if he or she is sufficiently interesting; the best protection is to be dull, bland and predictable. <p>Conversely, anyone with a modicum of a public identity must know that he or she is continually at risk in behaving impulsively in this rapacious era of memoirs, taped conversations and wiretaps. To commit one's most intimate feelings to paper, in letters, is the height of naivete, or hope. Immanuel Kant's great moral imperative -- that we should behave at all times in such a way that our actions might constitute an imperative for all human beings -- might be modified as a warning: we should assume that any confidence made to anyone, verbally or in writing, no matter in what private, precious circumstances, will possibly be betrayed, if only inadvertently.</p> <p>When personal letters of mine written to a former friend were first offered for sale, some years ago, I reacted with shock, hurt and disappointment. I was embarrassed that I seemed to have made a fool of myself, in writing openly and impulsively (and without revising!) to one who thought so little of me, and may have intended exploitation from the first. (These were not love letters.)</p> <p>In time, however, I came to view such ''betrayals'' in a philosophical light. The act of sending a letter is an act of generosity, even if, in retrospect, it might seem reckless. Why regret one's generosity? Why regret one's impulsiveness, one's misjudgment of others? The inevitable discovery that someone is selling letters you'd written in trust is simply to discover an obvious human truth: there are those who don't cherish us as we'd cherished them, and had wished to be cherished by them.</p></blockquote><br />I share plenty of personal stories on this blog, but I rarely regret this. I do, however, regret the many, many words I've written to former friends and lovers. I highly doubt that such letters will ever be "sold," though certainly I expect that intimacies have been betrayed. I also regret, more abstractly, wasting so many words on such people. So many feelings contained in those words. So much honesty, hopefulness, love and trust, that such words were not going to be thrown away to people who did not deserve them. Perhaps, in time, I will attain the philosophical perspective of Oates, and learn not to regret my "generosity, impulsiveness, misjudgment of others." It's hard to get there, though.<br /><br />As I've gotten older, less naive, and less romantic in nature, I've learned to devalue the written word. But in a good way! I trust more in action, unspoken gesture, and subtle intimacy, over effulgent prose with so many failed promises. I trust more in the idea of things "feeling right" than in "saying the right things." Though I confess that occasionally, I do want to <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ydE32Z_I0TY">hear the right thing</a>. There are a million idiosyncratic ways to express affection and reinforce intimacy. Declarative statements are but one vehicle, and I've learned to highly mistrust purple prose. I've also learned to be more restrained with my own words. While I will still verbally express affection and will go so far as to write such sentiments down, I've become less extravagant and more economical in how I express such sentiments. Less "<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BBglIsllYYw">I'd climb the highest mountain</a>," and more "<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qRvgKtXtypU&amp;feature=related">I'd hang out with you</a>." It does feel more authentic and honest. I also share less<br /><br />Somewhere, the 18 year old lit major inside me is dying. When I was 19, I complained about my too naive, too-romantic nature to a friend, who said that was what he liked best about me. At the time, it was the best compliment I'd ever received. Nowadays, I'm not so sure.http://lawandletters.blogspot.com/2009/06/joyce-carol-oates-on-salingers-love.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Belle Lettre)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21564696.post-371280355517258155Mon, 08 Jun 2009 04:47:00 +00002009-06-07T22:30:15.362-07:00the ups and downs of married lifeIf you didn't cry (or sob uncontrollably, in my case) at the wordless montage of a happy marriage punctuated by sadness and unfulfilled promises set to Michael Giacchino's song "Married Life" in <span style="font-style: italic;">Up</span>, you sir/madam, have no heart.<br /><br /><object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/LaLegF2hAxI&amp;hl=en&amp;fs=1&amp;"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/LaLegF2hAxI&amp;hl=en&amp;fs=1&amp;" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object><br /><br />I loved the movie and alternately laughed and cried and felt grateful for every day adventures.http://lawandletters.blogspot.com/2009/06/ups-and-downs-of-married-life.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Belle Lettre)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21564696.post-182059881580494881Fri, 05 Jun 2009 18:56:00 +00002009-06-05T13:21:23.634-07:00sociability indexProgress: last night I went to a dinner party hosted by a friend in which I made more friends. And it'll be a semi-regular thing, because she wants to start up a semi-weekly support group for her friends taking the bar. What a lovely idea. Since I'm not doing anything super stressful this summer (well, other than ongoing dissertation work, which is its own nightmare), I was glad to be invited. And on Sunday I'm going over to a friend's house to watch TV. That's right, watch TV. I no longer will attempt any moral righteousness over not connecting my physical TV, since I watch a lot of TV through Hulu and DVDs, and have now made a TV-date. Not brunch, not hiking, not farmer's market shopping, as is the typical Sunday activity among my kind in these parts, but TV watching. We're also ordering pizza.<br /><br />Also, tips on how to be a good guest to a stressed-out hostess who's trying to do a nice thing for all of her other stressed-out friends: call in advance and ask if there's any help needed. Come over 40 minutes early and make empanadas and chop vegetables. Stay late and do the dishes. This way your hostess, who's also your very good friend, can fall asleep right away and wake up and study, rather than clean. I wanted to bring something, but I had a <a href="http://cheapness-studies.blogspot.com/2009/06/cheap-and-thrifty-but-not-necessarily.html">lemon bar FAIL</a>. So I brought myself, and a bit of elbow grease. Next week I'm bringing chocolate chip cookies, which would be hard for me to mess up. Not impossible, but hard.http://lawandletters.blogspot.com/2009/06/sociability-index.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Belle Lettre)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21564696.post-5636952784199847159Thu, 04 Jun 2009 21:26:00 +00002009-06-04T14:30:10.785-07:00Cheapness Studies, the blog<a href="http://cheapness-studies.blogspot.com/">A new interdisciplinary blog</a> by me, <a href="http://foureyedgremlin.blogspot.com/">Miss Self-Important</a>, and <a href="http://whatwouldphoebedo.blogspot.com/">Phoebe Maltz</a>! We all have introductory posts up. Because nothing conquers blog exhaustion like starting another blog.<br /><br /> <a href="http://cheapness-studies.blogspot.com/">Check it out!</a>http://lawandletters.blogspot.com/2009/06/cheapness-studies-blog.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Belle Lettre)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21564696.post-404551936543297335Thu, 04 Jun 2009 07:07:00 +00002009-06-04T00:07:00.723-07:00I don't want to die watching baseball like that guy's mom did in A Prayer for Owen Meany.Why can't I ever remember that character's name, when this was my favorite book my sophomore year in high school (shut up)? Anyway, update on the muffled hearing/ringing tone/ear ache situation: I just have to wait it out, and this fluid in my ears should go away after a few...weeks. Until then, I will be saying "what?" a lot, and there will be plenty of private in-jokes about how we're just like one of those odd couple sitcoms/mixed race buddy movies in which every line is a funny misunderstanding that generates a laugh track. And TD comes back tonight (before I go away again on the 16th to visit my parents, so we at least have some together time between our many trips), so maybe I'll stop being emo.<br /><br />On Friday we're going to a baseball game, and the forecast is for thunderstorms. I am planning on packing soup and tea, and hoping that it won't be completely rained out. <a href="http://www.slate.com/id/2218733/">I will also hope to not die in the pursuit of America's favorite past time</a>:<br /><br /><p></p><blockquote><p>It's weirdly moving, if not exactly consoling, to learn just how many of baseball's casualties made the play before expiring. There's the amateur shortstop who, in 1902, caught a bad hop in the throat and used his last moments to throw out the runner at first. The third baseman in an Indiana league who, in 1909, tagged out the runner plowing headfirst into his gut, then succumbed to the resulting internal injuries three days later. There's just something about baseball that inspires a kind of heroic resolve.<a name="return"> </a>John McSherry, the major league umpire who collapsed at Cincinnati's Riverfront Stadium in 1996, had actually postponed treatment for the heart condition that felled him so he could call the game.<a href="http://www.slate.com/id/2218733/#correction">*</a> It was Opening Day.</p><p>All the old romantic baseball tropes turn up again and again in <em>Death at the Ballpark</em>. But the effect is haunting, since here each is mercilessly punctuated with a death. There's the aging minor leaguer, battling his way back to the majors after a couple of stints in the show—except that Millard Fillmore "Dixie" Howell, who played in the White Sox farm system in the '50s, never gets called up again and dies of a heart attack instead. A few incidents are such ruthless perversions of our shared baseball idylls that it's as if Roman Polanski had recut <em><a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/078322611X?ie=UTF8&amp;tag=slatmaga-20&amp;link_code=as3&amp;camp=211189&amp;creative=373489&amp;creativeASIN=078322611X" target="_blank">Field of Dreams</a></em>. One July night in a backyard in Houston in 1950, a 7-year-old boy asks if he can throw his dad one more pitch before heading inside. The father says OK. The son pitches. Then the father swings and connects, inadvertently "striking his son over the heart." The son dies before they can make it to the hospital.</p><p>There's no underestimating baseball's versatile capacity for killing us. Late Commissioner <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/1989/09/02/obituaries/giamatti-scholar-and-baseball-chief-dies-at-51.html?scp=1&amp;sq=obituary%20bartlett%20giamatti&amp;st=cse" target="_blank">A. Bartlett Giamatti</a> famously wrote that baseball "is designed to break your heart," and the statement takes on new meaning reading <em>Death at the Ballpark</em>, particularly Gorman and Weeks' section on <em>commotio cordis</em>, or concussions of the heart. A <em>commotio cordis</em> can be brought about only by getting struck at a particular place in the chest at the exact moment between heartbeats. And yet it manages to dispatch several pages' worth of victims.</p><br /><p>Then there's a story Gorman and Weeks had both heard versions of but always assumed was apocryphal until they ran down a local newspaper account confirming it: In Morristown, Ohio, in 1902, one man asks another if he can borrow his penknife so he can sharpen the pencil he's using to keep score. The second man hands his penknife to the guy seated between them, named Stanton Walker, and asks Walker to pass it on. At that exact moment, a foul ball whaps Walker on the wrist, and he stabs himself. </p><p>Still, in the end, you could choose to see something slightly uplifting about the sheer volume of these freak and incomprehensible accidents. Take it as an indicator of just how much time Americans have spent on and around baseball fields over the last century and a half—of what baseball means to us. We've managed to die on the diamond in so many crazy ways only because it's one of the places we've done the most living. We've all been shagging flies in that minefield together. </p></blockquote>http://lawandletters.blogspot.com/2009/06/i-dont-want-to-die-watching-baseball.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Belle Lettre)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21564696.post-7786717526306215780Wed, 03 Jun 2009 06:35:00 +00002009-06-02T23:38:47.766-07:00California's CrisisAt the LSA, I attended the "Many Faces of Constitutionalism" panel, for which Sandy Levinson was the chair/discussant. Among his remarks about the short life of most constitutions (the average is 18 years, I believe, correct me in the comments) is that some constitutions render states ungovernable, and thus <span style="font-style: italic;">should</span> be rebooted. He used California as such an example, as my home state requires 2/3 majority to pass a budget, and has (what I think, you may disagree) ridiculous recall/referendum provisions that make it insanely easy to pass stupid laws and amend the state constitition by popular vote. He said that not a single federal dollar should go to California until it holds a constitutional convention. In light of our budget crisis and the emergency election we just had, I'm inclined to agree.<br /><br />So why is California so messed up? How did we get this way?<br /><br />Louis Warren, a history professor at UC Davis and guest blogger at Edge of the American West, tells the story of my baffling, beleaguered state in two posts:<br /><br />1. <a href="http://edgeofthewest.wordpress.com/2009/05/21/how-we-got-here-thoughts-on-the-state-of-california/">How we got here</a>.<br /><br />2. <a href="http://edgeofthewest.wordpress.com/2009/05/29/californias-crisis-and-the-collapse-of-the-republican-party/#more-9397">California's crisis and the collapse of the Republican party</a>.<br /><br />These are definitely worth reading.http://lawandletters.blogspot.com/2009/06/californias-crisis.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Belle Lettre)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21564696.post-5589053650020479261Wed, 03 Jun 2009 06:04:00 +00002009-06-02T23:44:05.475-07:00I need more people to talk to so that I can tell whether I'm going deaf.I called the Advice Nurse about my left ear, which is the first step to obtaining health care at my school. She suggested taking decongestants, and if my hearing/feeling of stuffed-upness doesn't improve, to call for a same day appointment to see if it's not something more serious.<br /><br />I've taken about three doses now, and for a while I couldn't tell if things were improving, mainly because without TD (who is currently out of town), I have no one to talk to, since I work from home at my sweet ergonomic set up, or very rarely, at one of the libraries (only if I'm reading). I tried listening to podcasts, but the sound is too "surround" coming from my cheap computer speakers, and so I can't really tell if my hearing is the same or improved. It works better when someone is trying to directly address me, since I can tell if the voice sounds muffled to one ear or the other, such that when they stand to my left I can't hear them as well. Headphones...you would think, but for some reason the companies, they do stereoscopic sound so that I am supposed to hear more poorly from just one earbud.<br /><br />So since I have not many friends in town who are free to just meet up to test my hearing (the few friends I have are studying for the bar or are probably busy with work, their own lives, etc.), I tried to sing out loud to Lizzie West's "Chariot's Rise" and Sheryl Crow's "I Shall Believe" (I am teh emo when TD is gone) which makes me notice a sort of echo in my head, in which my own voice feeds back slightly muffled to my left ear. Sigh. I guess I should call for an appointment tomorrow.<br /><br />So, I'm slightly perplexed by my stuffed up ear, slightly concerned that I am way too self-isolating working from home and not social enough, and even more concerned that should I move away for a short-term fellowship or clerkship, I would lose my main source of company and will probably feel devastatingly lonely. I mean, I would still apply and go if accepted, of course. But I am filled with premature ambivalence and emo-ness. For a permanent move, we plan to move together (operative word being plan, which as Robert Burns will tell you...), but for a short separation, we would go separate ways and "make it work." Of course, I guess I would just have to reach out more and make new friends, but the very idea fills me with anxiety and preemptive sadness (I am Super Emo Girl, indeed). It's a scary thing, putting all your eggs into one basket, even if you love the basket so much you would hug it to you until the wicker cracked (bad metaphor! can you imagine that visual!). Without TD around, I've just been eating cereal, toast, graham crackers, fruit, and I did make myself some bean soup just to actually eat protein. I can easily imagine how I'd devolve back to my lonely, don't talk to anyone all day and eat cereal by yourself as you read the NYT and then stay up all night insomniac self that I was for most of my young adult life. I can't recall what it was like when I last had a boyfriend, since I was young and stupid and it was mostly long distance.<br /><br />But I do remember what it was like during law school and the year I lived at my parents' house, in which I was whether by intent or accident mostly keeping to my own company, and would go for a whole day without talking to someone. Well, when living with my parents, I did talk, but in Vietnamese, so I got disused to talking in English about things that interested me, and I would go to the store just to see if I could do small talk. Actually, that was when and why I started this blog, so that I could have people to at least write to and form a community of author to reader. And it worked! I broke through my intellectual isolation with this blog, and I even made blog friends. I became so very insecure about my social skills during this time, though, such that when I finally met my first blog friend in person, SEK, I prepped him with this fear, in case I talked way too fast and too spastically and gesticulated nervously, which I sometimes think, can scare people. Seriously, I might hit you in the eye if we meet and I'm nervous.<br /><br />Ironically, it was because of this blog that I'm now much more confident in my social skills. I kept on meeting strangers because I would start epistolary friendships via the greater popularity of the Belle Lettre alter ego, and I even got used to meeting such blog friends in person if I happened to be traveling in their area. I got used to meeting so many professors and readers that I started getting confident enough in my social skills to start dating again. Yes, I actually did not really date between college and now. Maybe I had two isolated dates in the intervening period, and you can imagine how those went. I can count on less than two hands the number of real, not ambiguous dates I've been on in my life. Like, it would actually amost fit on one hand. So when I did start dating again, just two years ago, I was a nervous wreck, but at least confident that I could talk about anything with anyone, and I learned to control my hand gestures so that I would not sock my date in the eye. One of the great virtues of being an academic is that I've learned to control the pace of my speech (at least when I'm presenting), so that if I try to pretend that I'm giving a talk or lecture, I will consciously slow down. Of course, this is ridiculous when you're trying to be charming and even flirtatious (not that I'm good at that) on a date. So after a few botched first-and-last dates, I got the hang of non-academic didactic talking and non-talking about the blogs we both read conversation enough to somehow charm TD. And since then he's been my favorite conversational partner, and so this muffly silence is kind of like a preview of what it would be if we did ever move away from each other, even for a little while, which reminds me not only of that isolating year living with my parents, but also The Month of Emo, in which I barely ate, scarcely left my apartment except to go on hours long walks, and watched Buffy for 10 hours a day.<br /><br />This isn't an advice seeking post (Comments will be moderated for not at all needed snarkiness, and if you are addressing me or commenting on my story, I'd prefer email. If you would like to share your own story or feelings, comment away.). I've done long-distance, and of course it can work. Of course your example of long distance not working or working is great anecdotal evidence of either. Of course I am socially adept enough to make new friends and of course I should just put more effort into my social life and diversify my stocks of friends and conversational partners. I am just complaining a little, is all. Indulge me my lapses into emo. This is just a bit of oversharing and introspection, kind of like the posts I used to write before law professors started reading me. And to those law professors: don't read if you don't want the emo and oversharing! And yes, I am definitely interested in your VAP or fellowship, in whichever state, however far away! There's always frequent flier miles. Part of the trouble of writing for a dual audience (some of you like the personal stuff; some of you come here for the decreasing amounts of law/academia related blogging) is never being able to please everyone. On the one hand, given my open secret status in the legal blogosphere, I could become more circumspect (as I have been for the past couple of years) and talk about nothing personal, and not be honest about my feelings of ambivalence and my struggles with things that come with the territory of being an academic. On the other, I could write what I just did, be honest about my limits and fears, and seriously consider deleting this post at the end of the week when I am less emo.http://lawandletters.blogspot.com/2009/06/i-need-more-people-to-talk-to-so-that-i.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Belle Lettre)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21564696.post-5662778528466352792Tue, 02 Jun 2009 04:25:00 +00002009-06-01T22:12:25.613-07:00Things I learned at the LSAI'm back! I had a productive and overall good experience. I presented and got some good feedback, I attended panels and learned interesting things about new research projects and developments, I schmoozed a bit, talked to really nice people who are interested in my future, and explored a bit of the city. I maintain that <a href="http://prawfsblawg.blogs.com/prawfsblawg/2006/07/unsolicited_adv.html">Orly Lobel still has the best advice for how to have a successful LSA experience</a>, but here are a few of my own tips for struggling, poor graduate students, and lessons learned the hard way.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Cheapness tips:</span><br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">1. Don't stay at the conference hotel if you can't afford it.</span><br /><br />With another friend, I split the cost of a cheap motel (the Ramada Inn) a good mile away in the grungier parts of Denver's downtown, at a rate that was at least $50-75 less per night than the conference hotel. True, it was a bit of a 20 minute walk, but the motel had free wireless, and a free shuttle service that dropped us off and picked us up wherever we wanted in downtown. The reviews were pretty bad, but I like the idea of gonzo academia (which this wasn't!) and I thought of the pervasive smell of smoke and '70s decor as part of the hotel's character. I actually liked the grungy neighborhood, which reminded me much of Liberal College City, except with restaurants actually open late with lots of young, happy and hip people inside of them drinking and cavorting. Denver is a cool city! Seriously, take TripAdvisor's reviews with a grain of salt. If you are not The Princess and the Pea, you will be fine. I am all bourgie and up in that with my 350 thread count sheets I got on sale and my Le Creuset dutch oven that I got for Hanukkah and love of brand named snack foods (generic Doritos != the same!), but I did just fine. I loved the neighborhood full of brick houses and dive bars and coffee shops, and the only "<a href="http://www.tripadvisor.com/ShowUserReviews-g33388-d85325-r18433538-Ramada_Inn_Downtown_Denver-Denver_Colorado.html#CHECK_RATES_CONT">characters</a>" I ran into were two nuns who tried to convert me.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">2. GoogleMap your location to find grocery stores and reduce the amount you have to eat out.</span><br /><br />I wanted to pack food, but I also wanted to not check in luggage. I compromised by hitting a grocery store (Whole Foods! Very bourgie!) 0.5 miles away when I arrived, picking up lots of non-perishable fruit, muffins (if our motel room had had a fridge, I would have bought cereal and milk and lunch meats and bread for lunch), nuts, and graham crackers. I spent maybe $25 for the two of us, and we had a healthy breakfast every day, and fruit snacks throughout the day. Conference people stopped me to ask where I got my apple, so starved were they for non-cookie nourishment. Even though I dislike shopping at expensive grocery stores for basic items, by buying Gala apples on sale for $1.99/lb (not my usual ethnic grocery store price of $0.79, but certainly better than the $2.99 they were asking for Fujis, my favorite apple) and bananas and $4.39 for four flax/apple muffins, I didn't spend too much for four breakfasts and four days of snacks for two people, and it was much cheaper than buying marked up muffins and coffee at a Starbucks. Because I don't eat much, I actually was able to avoid paying for anything more than dinner, so long as I supplemented all of this with a big glass of milk in the form of a latte. So I basically only spent $20 a day on food, max, what with a $3.50 latte, the aforementioned muffin and fruit, nuts and crackers, and a not expensive dinner.<br /><br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">3. Eat as much free food as possible.</span><br /><br />We filled up at the receptions and drank the free coffee and took home the cocoa packets they had on the table. That also helped us work the room, saying hi to recognizable academics in our field, old professors, and new contacts, as we migrated from the sliders table to the salad bar to the pasta bar to the meat bar. Follow your stomach, and you too might make friends and influence future hiring chairs.<br /><br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">4. Get a law professor to take you out to dinner.</span><br /><br />I am actually really loathe to let anyone pay for my dinner because I just feel awful about it, but real professors do get comped and so maybe I am not a terrible person. And I didn't order anything bigger than a $3 mac and cheese side (I had filled up too much on free food and my cheap muffins and apples), so I guess I shouldn't feel too bad, especially if the law prof in question is a friend and the nicest person in academia. And it lets you get to spend more time with academics and make friends and talk about your research, before you move onto more important things like talking about which HBO series is best.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">5. Don't drink.</span><br /><br />I am always glad that in academia, no one ever questions why you are not drinking and there's no peer pressure to drink and keep up. I just don't like drinking enough to begin with, and it's needlessly expensive. And since we were at high altitude, everything just affected me more--dehydration, caffeine, alcohol. I had maybe two drinks out of politeness and sociability, and I didn't finish either of them. Good thing they were cheap drinks. <br /><br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Lessons learned the hard way:</span><br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">1. Submit your drafts early, and consider workshopping the same paper at a smaller colloquium.</span><br /><br />Most people don't submit until the last minute (ahem), so the feedback is of limited quality and utility, but I guess the point of the LSA is to meet and greet in the halls and receptions, and everyone generally acknowledges that the panels suck. There are too many of them, and so panelists often outnumber audience, and even if there is an audience, there is at most 10 minutes after the discussant/chair goes through the papers for there to be any commentary from your fellow panelists or the audience. I asked a couple of decent questions, but in general the panels I attended had limited participation, which is a bit frustrating compared to my very good experiences at smaller colloquia.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">2. Belle is much more popular than The Real Life Alter Ego.</span><br /><br />I should always introduce myself as Belle Lettre. I am much more popular than my RLAE. I introduced myself as _______ at the Prawfs/Co-Op happy hour, and got a polite nod and a few questions about myself. I re-introduced myself as Belle Lettre, and immediately got enthusiastic "I love your blogging!" and "when are you going on the market?" and "you should consider this fellowship!" responses, and much sustained chit chatting about law, life, and everything. Because I was not drinking, I was sharp and personable and perky and if I may say, charming. Some people need alcohol to be more charming. While I certainly laugh more and so <span style="font-style: italic;">you</span> become more charming if I drink, I myself am slower and slurry speeched after drinking. I suggest staying sober, talking about the panels and about your own research, and asking the people there about any advice they might give you.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">3. Be prepared for altitude sickness.</span><br /><br />I didn't get it, but in general, you should remember to <span style="font-style: italic;">drink lots of water</span> when you're a mile above sea level. I was constantly thirsty though, so I very fortunately did bring lots of water. They had free water, of course, but I made it even easier by saving my free water bottle and re-filling it so that I could bring water from panel to panel.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">4. You could get a ruptured ear drum or ear infection.</span><br /><br />My left ear has been feeling blocked, and my hearing has felt muffled and decreased, since last Wednesday. It may have to do with the change in pressure and elevation I've been experiencing because of flying and being in Mile High City. It hasn't improved, and TD says I could go deaf and whatever. So I am going to call the health center tomorrow. Sigh.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">5. Get out and see the city.</span><br /><br />It is so exhausting going to all the panels and running around with only 15 minutes in between each session. I took off a couple of the afternoon sessions to walk around and get a feel for the city. We took the entire Saturday afternoon off to go to the Denver Aquarium. We actually had fun at the LSA and were much more relaxed than we usually are at conferences. I strongly suggest doing this. I also suggest meeting up with a cool local blogger for dinner, which is such a welcome relief from the exhausting schmoozefest of the receptions. Blogging has certainly made my conference going more enjoyable, because I never lack for a dinner companion and local guide!<br /><br /><br />So that's it from me. I will say that it's good to be back, even though I had just one day with TD before <span style="font-style: italic;">he</span> went off to a conference of his own. Conferences in general are a huge time and energy and money suck, and it's a lot of time away from family, but all things considered, this was one of my more enjoyable conference experiences. I wasn't stressed all the time, I had fun, I made friends and contacts, and I got to see the city. I wasn't nearly puking from nervousness or overwhelmed with loneliness in a motel room at 2 am like I was at my first conference. Part of that is experience, of course, but it's also because through blogging I've come to "know" more people, whether at the conference or just in the city, and that's made it a lot better. I've also learned how to be more "normal" when traveling, e.g. by buying groceries and eating healthier. I've forced myself to be more social and set up dinner dates and go to receptions. I've made it a point to try to keep walking or stay active during these jaunts too, which makes me feel better and hopefully counteracted some of the mac and cheese and buffalo meatloaf I ate. All in all, a good conference experience, which is as much as you can ask for!http://lawandletters.blogspot.com/2009/06/things-i-learned-at-lsa.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Belle Lettre)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21564696.post-4304818252343830185Wed, 27 May 2009 15:56:00 +00002009-05-27T09:14:09.432-07:00LSA and SotomayorI'm at the airport en route to the LSA. I'm stuck here for a couple of hours. Ah, free wi-fi and plugs in airports. I'm moderately excited about the conference and learning new things and seeing old friends, but I also have grown to hate traveling and I never was that comfortable with schmoozing. Ah well. This is what they call academic socialization: we not only do academic research, but we must also <span style="font-style: italic;">become</span> academics. We are not yet, but we become. Blah blah.<br /><br />Anyway, here's a few links about the Sotomayor nomination that I particularly like:<br /><br />1. P<a href="http://prawfsblawg.blogs.com/prawfsblawg/2009/05/how-should-we-play-the-sotomayor-game.html">aul Horwitz's</a> post on the nomination game (best post I've read about the theater of the absurd of it all).<br /><br />2. <a href="http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2009/05/supreme-court-kabuki-watch">Kevin Drum</a> keeps with the theme and compares it to kabuki political theater.<br /><br />3. <a href="http://crookedtimber.org/2009/05/26/sotomayor/">Kieran Healy</a> looks at the same stage and sees a circus full of clowns.http://lawandletters.blogspot.com/2009/05/lsa-and-sotomayor.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Belle Lettre)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21564696.post-1752339938518770111Fri, 22 May 2009 18:15:00 +00002009-05-22T10:15:51.914-07:00I see Belle's Glee and raise her Petra HadenBecause... <br /><br />1) Petra Haden is all kinds of awesome<br />2) She is the daughter of Charlie Haden, who is ALSO all kinds of awesome<br />3) She is the sister-in-law of Jack Black, who is <i>occasionally</i> all kinds of awesome<br /><br /><object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/G_8Iy2PiH7g&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/G_8Iy2PiH7g&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object><br /><br />And I am also partial to this <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VNFoNBz9Dbs">Petra Haden cover as well</a>.http://lawandletters.blogspot.com/2009/05/i-see-belles-glee-and-raise-her-petra.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Max)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21564696.post-787382584627302902Thu, 21 May 2009 20:16:00 +00002009-05-21T13:23:48.313-07:00It's like The Wire, but in real life!<span style="text-decoration: underline;"></span><br /><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/21/nyregion/21witness.html?hpw">This guy</a> sounds even more unscrupulous than <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maurice_Levy_%28The_Wire%29">Maury Levy</a> (although I'm only done with Season 3, so who knows):<br /><br /><p> </p><blockquote><p>[Former prosecutor Paul Begrin] went on to become one of the state’s most prominent defense lawyers, representing clients as varied as Abu Ghraib defendants, the rap stars <a href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/l/lil_kim/index.html?inline=nyt-per" title="More articles about Lil' Kim.">Lil’ Kim</a> and <a href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/q/queen_latifah/index.html?inline=nyt-per" title="More articles about Queen Latifah.">Queen Latifah</a> and members of Newark’s notorious street gangs.</p><p> But federal authorities charged Wednesday that the success their former colleague, Paul Bergrin, had in defending drug dealers and gang leaders was based on a brutal calculus that he had boiled down to a phrase he repeated like a slogan: No witnesses, no case.</p><p> In an indictment unsealed on Wednesday in United States District Court in Newark, prosecutors accused Mr. Bergrin, 53, of orchestrating the murder of a confidential witness by leaking his name to drug dealers who shot him in broad daylight on a Newark street corner; of traveling to Chicago to hire a murderer to kill a witness in another case; of coaching some eyewitnesses to lie; and of paying others to change their stories or leave town on the day they were to testify.</p> To prosecutors, the charges are the latest example of the deadly challenge they face protecting witnesses at a time when the criminal justice system has few resources to shield them and the prevailing street code in many cities urges civilians to “stop snitching.”<br /><br /><p>In late 2003, however, a wiretapped conversation between Mr. Bergrin and one of his clients led prosecutors to view him as not just a legal adversary but a potential defendant. </p><p>According to court records, the conversation captured him telling his client’s cousin, one of Newark’s most powerful drug lords, the identity of a confidential witness: Deshawn McCray, known as Kemo. A few days later, the authorities say, Mr. Bergrin met with his client’s cousin again and told him “No Kemo, no case.” </p><p>Mr. McCray was shot to death three months later in a brutal ambush, forcing prosecutors to drop the charges against Mr. Bergrin’s client, William Baskerville. </p><p>Although the authorities had testimony accusing Mr. Bergrin of providing both the inducement and identity that led to Mr. McCray’s killing, the case could not be prosecuted after a judge ruled — and the prosecutors acknowledged — that they mishandled the wiretap tapes, rendering them inadmissible as evidence.</p><p>But as they began examining Mr. Bergrin’s legal work, they now say, they noticed what appeared to be a pattern; in at least four other cases, his clients had been cleared after witnesses were either killed or changed their stories.</p><p>Law enforcement officials said that unlike many of the cases Mr. Bergrin is accused of trying to tamper with, which hinged on the testimony of a single witness, the charges against Mr. Bergrin and his four co-defendants were pieced together using a wide assortment of documents, recorded conversations and testimony from numerous witnesses. </p><p>“He liked to say ‘No witnesses, no case,’ but we have witnesses, we have evidence and we have a good case,” said Weysan Dun, special agent in charge of the New Jersey office of the <a href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/f/federal_bureau_of_investigation/index.html?inline=nyt-org" title="More articles about the Federal Bureau of Investigation.">F.B.I.</a></p></blockquote><p><a href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/f/federal_bureau_of_investigation/index.html?inline=nyt-org" title="More articles about the Federal Bureau of Investigation."></a></p><p><br /></p>http://lawandletters.blogspot.com/2009/05/its-like-wire-but-in-real-life.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Belle Lettre)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21564696.post-4966922239819805340Wed, 20 May 2009 19:33:00 +00002009-05-20T12:37:45.271-07:00fill your heart with gleeOMG, it's like they wrote this show especially for me. <span style="font-style: italic;">Bring it On</span> meets <span style="font-style: italic;">Election </span>meets <span style="font-style: italic;">Freaks and Geeks</span>, with my favorite song as a finale:<br /><br /><br /><object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/y-eD-AQjByQ&amp;hl=en&amp;fs=1"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/y-eD-AQjByQ&amp;hl=en&amp;fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>http://lawandletters.blogspot.com/2009/05/fill-your-heart-with-glee.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Belle Lettre)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21564696.post-8015973953809048968Mon, 18 May 2009 23:26:00 +00002009-05-18T16:35:34.734-07:00random roundup with no commentaryGah, too busy, such that I'm eating Cheerios out of the box and pre-shredded mozzarella out of the bag (I am disgustingly grad student-y when I'm on my own and eating alone).<br /><br />1. <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/19/health/19well.html?hp">Kept from a partner's dying bedside</a>.<br /><br />2. <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alec-baldwin/the-rise-and-fall-of-detr_b_204462.html">Alec Baldwin on the Rise and Fall of Detroit</a>. <br /><br />3. <a href="http://crookedtimber.org/2009/05/18/tmi-seriously/">Maria Farrell gives us TMI</a>.<br /><br />4. <a href="http://www.esquire.com/features/mri-of-love-0609">An MRI of love</a> (don't try this at home).<br /><br />5. <a href="http://www.slate.com/id/2218596/">How Obama is like Spock</a>.http://lawandletters.blogspot.com/2009/05/random-roundup-with-no-commentary.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Belle Lettre)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21564696.post-8343533501067161119Sun, 17 May 2009 17:08:00 +00002009-05-17T10:08:00.353-07:00The NYT is full of cautionary tales1. <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/14/garden/14lead.html?hpw">Be careful of lead when you plant your urban garden</a>.<br /><br />2. <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/17/us/17blunders.html?pagewanted=1&amp;hp">Beware of DIY-madness</a>! It can result in DISASTER. There's a reason I won't cut my own hair!<br /><br />3. <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/17/fashion/17games.html?hpw">Don't play ridiculous Dada-esque "art sports"</a> or else I will mock you. Okay, maybe that wasn't the point of this article. I hesitate to call this a hipster phenomenon, since there's no indication that the attempt at irony is disingenuous. At least arts sports are willfully surreal and ridiculous, rather than inadvertently so in the manner of adult kickball and dodgeball (and don't get me started on "Ultimate." There's a park in the middle of The City where people do all sorts of crazy things with balls on sticks. I cannot begin to comprehend.http://lawandletters.blogspot.com/2009/05/nyt-is-full-of-cautionary-tales.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Belle Lettre)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21564696.post-7687258104023977034Sat, 16 May 2009 16:34:00 +00002009-05-16T09:34:00.098-07:00I can't watch horror movies eitherI generally refuse to watch rape and/or torture scenes, or violent killings. At the very least, I will turn away and ask "is it over yet?" Occasionally, I will abstain from watching the movie/show at all, if the violence is prolonged and too much a part of the overall work. <a href="http://www.salon.com/mwt/col/tenn/2009/05/15/tv_violene/index.html">I'm not alone</a>. Fortunately, I don't usually have to defend my choices. If you want to watch, fine by me, but I will probably be in another room, reading a book. I don't think I'm missing out on something that is aesthetically or culturally important. The same appreciation of the darkness of humanity can be obtained by reading the newspaper or some other fictionalized account. So I don't get why people feel like they have to foist their choices on another, especially if it creates such a negative effect. I don't care if <span style="font-style: italic;">Deliverance</span> is a classic. I never, ever want to watch again that scene where that one of the guys is called a pig, has a knife put to his throat, and is threatened with sodomy.http://lawandletters.blogspot.com/2009/05/i-cant-watch-horror-movies-either.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Belle Lettre)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21564696.post-130864310180431681Fri, 15 May 2009 19:09:00 +00002009-05-15T12:33:31.027-07:00a spirited defense of amateurism and in-group cliqueishness<a href="http://internetfoodassociation.com/2009/05/14/you-sadden-the-ifa-per-se/">This negative review of Thomas Keller's restaurant Per Se</a> by <a href="http://bamber.blogspot.com/2008/02/ezra-klein-shameless-poseur.html">Ezra Klein</a> was meant to invite the blog drama. My favorite comment, <a href="http://internetfoodassociation.com/2009/05/14/you-sadden-the-ifa-per-se/#comment-6008">by a chef</a>:<br /><br /><p></p><blockquote><p>As for the dissing of the IFA, I must say that most of my hate wasn’t directed as Ezra. However, I do think that this isn’t a typical blog. Many of the writers are known for their work in other spheres, which gives them a certain influence that must be used carefully. It’s foolish to think that people who have no clue about food don’t read this blog even though they may read the IFA writers’ other blogs. Ben Miller and Amanda Mattos, for example, have posted utter nonsense, and are NOT good cooks. Yet the name of the blog, and the blogging cred of some of its contributors, pumps up the value of this blog in a dishonest way. As a chef, I know that uninformed bloggers can have a distorting effect that is bad for the food industry. People are fetishizing food and chefs instead of understanding the basic theories of cooking and the proper metrics by which to evaluate food. Blogs like this only increase this problem. When I read Ezra Klein saying oysters and pearls’ only value is in its outrageous luxury, it’s a little annoying to those of us that understand how brilliantly balanced and refined that dish is on so many levels. I’m not saying food isn’t for everyone. I just wish people would get some experience and really build a sound knowledge base before starting a blog.</p> <p>Seriously. Stop the recipes. Stop posting so much. Take a step back. Learn from people who know how to cook. And focus on your other blogs, which are much more interesting. Don’t be like Noam Chomsky, who is a great linguist but a terrible political analyst.</p> <p>Oh, and it’s spelled PALATE, not palette.</p></blockquote><p></p><p><br /></p><p>Well, I also like <a href="http://internetfoodassociation.com/2009/05/14/you-sadden-the-ifa-per-se/#comment-6001">this zinger</a>:</p><p></p><blockquote><p>You all, while a step above average, are amateurs. You aren’t great cooks. You have posts deriding Per Se that don’t get Per Se. You have articles about how overrated ramps are. Another talks about making ricotta, but it isn’t about ricotta. The recipes are pedestrian. Your claim to fame seems to be an overuse of dried red pepper flakes.</p> <p>Yet you write as if you know what you are talking about. You “almost” aren’t qualified to criticize Per Se? What remotely qualifies you to review any restaurant, let alone that restaurant, let alone after but one visit?</p> <p>I am not saying you aren’t a true critic simply because you don’t like Per Se. You may life and love and hate as you wish. But you need to understand before you write about it.</p> <p>This whole enterprise makes me question if you know what you are talking about in your day job’s blog. I sure hope so. For the record, I read several IFA author’s primary blogs and other writings and I love you guys. But while you might be into food, you aren’t real cooks or proper critics. Stick to what you [hopefully] know.</p></blockquote><p></p><br /><br />Kate Steadman, a fellow Internet Food Association blogger, offers <a href="http://internetfoodassociation.com/2009/05/15/about-our-amateurism/">this spirited defense</a>:<br /><blockquote><br /><p>So Ezra wrote a post about Per Se and obviously pushed some buttons. But these comments ripping the blog about being amateurish just completely miss the point of this endeavor.</p> <p>The IFA was started because a close group of friends were getting increasingly obsessed with cooking and food. We thought it would be fun to work on a new blog — a place to write because “we are united by a shared recognition that <em>all those things suck</em>, and we’d much rather talk about food.”</p> <p>Not a single contributor to this blog is a chef. This is the internet – you know, that wonderful place where we don’t have to be a professional to talk about what we love. I have an amazing day job — health policy is my proverbial bread and butter — but little compares to the creativity, satisfaction and generosity that’s part of being a home cook.</p> <p>I’m young. I’ve only been cooking on my own for five years, and new disasters and revelations appear everyday. But it’s absolutely ridiculous to say: “the IFA, while amusing, is all very amateurish.” DUH.</p><p>This blog is about our love of food. It’s our thoughts on restaurants, ingredients. We never claimed to be chefs.</p> <p>But that’s the point — most people aren’t chefs. Most people have the same experiences — they went to that crazy expensive restaurant and felt underwhelmed. They messed up meatballs. Protests of “you’re amateurs” are entertaining at best.</p> <p>Also, you’ve never tasted anything Amanda Mattos and Ben Miller have made. They’re both amazing cooks, and more than that — they are each one of the most warm, kind, hilarious, creative and giving persons you could ever know. So back off.</p></blockquote><p></p><p><br /></p><p>Take that, you blogospheric bullies and meanies. And your mom, too! I admit, I was highly amused by these exchanges. But I am a bad person. Far be it from me to get on my high horse about writing about things on which you are not expert. I rarely blog about my actual areas of expertise, nowadays!</p><p>Occasionally, I like the IFA. Like <a href="http://internetfoodassociation.com/2009/02/23/the-pretentious-is-the-enemy-of-the-good/">this post</a>, on how pretension is the enemy of the good, especially in food policy. I will refrain from making any comments about the expertise/amateurness of these self-proclaimed self-trained journalist "policy wonks," because that's a bit below the belt. Maybe they are! So maybe their other writings demonstrate a greater amount of expertise and thoughtfulness. But they themselves profess to have no expert knowledge about food or cooking, and so I'll leave it at that. What do you all think? Do you need to be an expert in order to express an intelligent opinion that can be accepted as a type of authority by another? What if you <a href="http://internetfoodassociation.com/about/">profess to have some measure of better than average knowledge</a> such that you will impart such knowledge onto grateful readers, to "help you cook"? What if no matter what, you sound like a tool who thinks that c<a href="http://internetfoodassociation.com/2009/05/13/why-i-cook/">ooking "should" be complicated, take a long time, and be competitive</a>? Okay, that last bit was mean. No pejorative epithets in happy la la Law and Letters land. I just think it's funny. Then again, most of the recipes I post here are along the lines of "what to cook if you are busy working all day" and "use canned broth, it's faster."<br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p>http://lawandletters.blogspot.com/2009/05/spirited-defense-of-amateurism-and-in.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Belle Lettre)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21564696.post-8813454328440035855Fri, 15 May 2009 07:03:00 +00002009-05-15T00:03:00.263-07:00Oprah SucksAnd not just because her O magazine has her on every cover. That's just too much of anyone.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.salon.com/env/vital_signs/2009/05/15/oprah_winfrey_health/index.html">She sucks because she puts anti-vaccine, pro-hormone replacement therapy quacks on her show</a>, and she's so influential that women will listen to her. And this is dangerous stuff! <br /><blockquote><br /><p>Hormone replacement therapy is one of medicine's most controversial subjects. In 2002, after a period of prescribing HRT routinely to women to improve their energy, sex drive, heart health and bone strength, and to reduce the risk of certain cancers, doctors were forced to do an abrupt about-face. A study known as the <a target="_blank" href="http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/whi/whi_faq.htm">Women's Health Initiative</a>, which followed more than 150,000 postmenopausal women starting in 1991, concluded that prolonged HRT (more than two years) increased the risk of heart attacks, strokes and breast cancer. It wasn't what doctors or their patients had hoped for, but it was the scientific truth. Doctors have therefore been recommending that hormone replacement therapy be taken for short periods of time to mitigate those risks.</p><p>But what Somers was advocating was radically different from standards of medical care. She admitted to using mega-doses of bioidenticals continuously and aggressively. She started her regimen, she told Winfrey, by rubbing bioidentical estrogen and progesterone creams on her arms, injecting another hormone, estriol, vaginally every day, and topping herself off with 60 different oral supplements. Physicians who may have been watching the show surely winced, but Winfrey was not concerned. "Many people write Suzanne off as a quackadoo," she declared. "But she just might be a pioneer."</p> <p>It's not the first time Winfrey's advice on health issues has raised concern. In the past, the media mogul has been criticized for promoting cosmetic therapies that were untested and later deemed dangerous. Her recent development deal with Jenny McCarthy, who now <a target="_blank" href="http://www.oprah.com/bi/jenny-mccarthy">blogs on Oprah.com</a> and has a television show in the works, drew criticism from children's advocates, as McCarthy and her autism advocacy group, Generation Rescue, have been leading an ideological, unscientific crusade against childhood vaccines. Add in Winfrey's endorsement of the snake-oil self-help book, "<a href="http://www.salon.com/mwt/feature/2007/03/05/the_secret/index.html">The Secret</a>," and Dr. Phil, and you might be tempted to sue her for malpractice.</p></blockquote><p></p><a href="http://www.slate.com/id/2217798/"><br />And here's a critique of her support of that quack Jenny McCarthy</a>:<br /><blockquote><br /><p>McCarthy's popularity has created a lot of <a href="http://www.jennymccarthybodycount.com/" target="_blank">anger</a> and <a href="http://www.stopjenny.com/" target="_blank">disbelief</a> in that tiny sliver of society that believes in evidence-based medicine. One person who's feeling particularly frustrated is David T. Tayloe, president of the 60,000-member American Academy of Pediatricians. (Remember them? A pediatrician is a person with a medical degree who takes care of children. Some of them are said to trust science more than celebrities when it comes to health care.)</p><p>"I think show business crosses the line when they give contracts to people like Jenny McCarthy," Tayloe says. "If you give her a bully pulpit, McCarthy is going to make people hesitate to vaccinate their children. She has no medical or scientific credentials. It disturbs us that she's given all these opportunities to make her pitch about vaccines on <em>Oprah</em> or <em>Larry King</em> or <em>U.S. News</em> or whatever. We have to scramble to get equal time—and who wants to see a gray-haired pediatrician talking about a serious topic like childhood vaccines when she's out there blasting the academy and blasting the federal government?" </p></blockquote><p></p>http://lawandletters.blogspot.com/2009/05/oprah-sucks.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Belle Lettre)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21564696.post-898023685424303527Thu, 14 May 2009 17:46:00 +00002009-05-14T11:51:16.134-07:00double x<a href="http://www.doublex.com/">Slate's new feminist magazine</a> is pretty good.<br /><br />Favorite links:<br /><a href="http://www.doublex.com/section/life/get-your-kid-your-facebook-page"><br />Get your kid off your facebook profile picture</a>.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.doublex.com/section/news-politics/new-language-feminism">The new language of feminism</a>.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.doublex.com/section/news-politics/make-it-work">Make feminism work</a>!<br /><a href="http://www.doublex.com/section/news-politics/feminism%E2%80%99s-problem-race"><br />Feminism's problem with race</a>.<br /><br />Katha Pollit's "<a href="http://www.doublex.com/section/news-politics/still-second-sex">Still the Second Sex</a>"<br /><br />Linda Hirshman, being Linda Hirshman, on "<a href="http://www.doublex.com/section/news-politics/trouble-jezebel">The Problem With Jezebel</a>." Smack your forehead, agree grudgingly with some points, disagree with others, question the overall tone if not the underlying argument.<br /><br />A post-feminist <a href="http://www.doublex.com/section/news-politics/feminist-makeover">opt-outer's critique of feminism's "responsibility" ethos</a> gets a resoundingly cold, harsh, entirely appropriate dressing down for the callow writing: "<a href="http://www.doublex.com/blog/xxfactor/if-your-future%E2%80%99s-bright-you-maybe-need-shades">If your future's that bright, maybe you need shades</a>."<br /><br /><a href="http://www.doublex.com/blog/xxfactor/burned-modern-love-heres-your-chance-revenge">The unwitting subjects of the inane NYT Modern Love columns answer back</a>!<br /><br />And re the last link, there's a reason why I try not to write anything about my significant other that's more detailed or intimate than "we argue about whether or not to wear shoes in the house and we have intellectual disagreements about domestic policy" No drama is relayed, nor do I share any insights gleaned through adversity (which I probably lack, not writing Modern Love columns). Eeesh!:<br /><br /><p></p><blockquote><p>What's true for immersion journalism is clearly not true for Modern Love. My ex's essay wasn't fictional enough to warrant changing gory details—the pet name "Froky" was plenty real, as is my little-used first name "Diana." Yet it wasn't factual enough to warrant fact-checking or objectivity; to mention that I was never consulted, warned, or interviewed about the piece is stating the obvious.</p> <p>From my perspective the article uses a sprinkling of facts to decorate a work of fiction. The essay skews timelines and words, takes events out of context, and characterizes things in a way that could be described as...creative. The overall effect was a complete rewriting of our relationship as I had lived it.</p> <p>I learned that baby talk had killed our relationship the same way everyone else did—by reading about it in the newspaper. You wouldn't know it from the essay, but my ex had never specifically mentioned this to me as a problem while we were together. The fact that he told the readers of the <em>New York Times</em> more about why we broke up than he had told me left me reeling. But I could hardly write to the Styles editor. Surely my objections would be dismissed as the rants of a scorned woman (a risk I obviously run by writing this article).</p> <p>To truly attain peace, there was only one thing to do: Write the author. So just as he had done for thousands of strangers, I did just for us: I sat down and wrote my heart out. I revealed things I had never shared when we were together, and I paid homage our past love. I conveyed my shock at his decision to blindside me with the article and my opinion that he had not told the whole truth.</p> <p>Surprisingly enough, my ex wrote back within the day. He was cool, civil, even kind. He addressed my concerns about the truth by admitting forthrightly: "Of course, my essay is not the truth. It's a version that is emotionally truthful for me...The essay isn't about you or me, and wasn't written for either of us, but only about how people struggle with these things."</p> <p>As his smooth prose flowed on, it was almost enough to make me doubt my gut. But then I realized: He wasn't writing to me as a man to woman, but as a published writer to civilian reader. He was a professional now, with a nice clip from the <em>New York Times</em> to prove it. He had told his story, and his story had sold.</p> <p>When the article was first published in 2005, Facebook was just for college kids, Twitter was a gleam in its founder's eye, and "I Bang the Worst Dudes" was a private lament, not a public blog. Today our online personas, blogs, tweets, videos, and Flickrs have made millions of us into semi-fictionalized stars of our own long-running docudramas. As a culture, we all have to reckon with how much is too intimate—and too fictional—to share about ourselves and our loved ones.</p> <p>It would make a snappy ending to say I've built a fantastically mature relationship with an amazingly playful man. But the facts are messier than that. I thought my relationship with my writerly ex would give me a marriage. Instead, I got dueling essays, which at the time, felt emotionally devastating and now seems darkly hilarious. As much as I told myself I dodged a bullet by ending things with someone who would so brazenly make his private life public, his piece played on my deepest fear that I was so flawed as to be unlovable. And while I knew I never wanted to have the kind of relationship where I had to get my intimate romantic news from the newspaper again, it was hard to forgive myself for letting it get to that point in the first place.</p></blockquote>http://lawandletters.blogspot.com/2009/05/double-x.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Belle Lettre)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21564696.post-7875608227833433728Wed, 13 May 2009 18:27:00 +00002009-05-13T11:37:17.270-07:00Random Roundup1. The always brilliant New Kid on the Hallway on <a href="http://newkidonthehallway.typepad.com/new_kid_on_the_hallway/">how academia and law school can negatively impact your personal relationship</a> (academia is worse). It's vaguely comforting to read, because while it suggests things will be hard and get harder, it also says "we'll get through this together."<br /><br />2. A bunch of spoiler-rich reviews of Star Trek, high on the enthusiasm, even higher on the critical contemplation of The Canon and continuity: <a href="http://edgeofthewest.wordpress.com/2009/05/12/by-god-jim-its-a-giant-red-ball-of/">Scott Eric Kaufman</a>, <a href="http://weblogs.swarthmore.edu/burke/?p=828">Timothy Burke</a>, <a href="http://inmedias.blogspot.com/2009/05/whats-fate-got-to-do-with-it-or-only.html">Russell Arben Fox</a>, <a href="http://bamber.blogspot.com/2009/05/review-star-trek.html">Amber Taylor</a>. The discussions are so awesome.<br /><br />3. How the GOP is misplaying their <a href="http://www.slate.com/id/2218103">anti-judicial empathy card</a>. God, it's like they all are disciples of Herbert Weschler or something.<br /><br />4. Not sure how expanding copyright protection to cover fashion design such that gutting the knockoff market will lead to "better, broader design", or how the vaguely defined "squint test" would actually work, but here's <a href="http://www.doublex.com/section/news-politics/forever-21-illegal">Jeannie Suk and Scott Hemphill</a> on this. (Via Amber)<br /><br />5. <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/13/dining/13local.html?hpw">Locavores annoy me</a>. And see, it's being turned on its own pointy head! I have still yet to write my "green exhaustion" blog post. Sanctimony and pretentiousness are poor drivers of any social movement.http://lawandletters.blogspot.com/2009/05/random-roundup.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Belle Lettre)0